Bishop Lori, legal and policy experts raise concerns; a representative of the Institute of Medicine defends the federal rule.

JOAN FRAWLEY DESMOND

WASHINGTON — Yesterday a full House Judiciary Committee hearing provided opponents of the HHS contraception mandate with a forum to explain why President Obama’s “accommodation” failed to address their concerns.

“This ‘accommodation’ would not change the scope of the mandate and its exemption,” stated Bishop William Lori of Bridgeport, Conn., in his Feb. 28 testimony during the House Judicial Committee hearing, “Executive Overreach: The HHS Mandate Versus Religious Liberty.”

“Instead, it would take the form of additional regulations whose precise contours are yet unknown and that may not issue until August 2013,” noted Bishop Lori, the chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, approved the final rule requiring virtually all private employers to provide co-pay-free contraception services despite objections from the USCCB, which said the religious exemption was too narrow to protect church-affiliated universities, social agencies and hospitals.

On Feb. 10, Obama unveiled his “accommodation,” which promised to pass on the cost of providing co-pay-free contraception services to insurance companies, and thus exempting religious institutions that morally objected to these services.

The U.S. bishops’ conference rejected the modification as essentially meaningless, noting that employers would be asked to pay higher premiums to cover additional services and that many church groups were self-insured and thus would pay directly for contraceptive services.

But Daughter of Charity Sister Carol Keehan, president and CEO of the Catholic Health Association, a trade group, said she was “pleased” with the modification, which reportedly would be incorporated into the final rule at an unspecified date, perhaps after the election.

After Obama announced his “accommodation,” the White House told reporters he was “done” with the issue. Yet, weeks later, the controversy has not lost steam on Capitol Hill or on the campaign trail.

On Feb. 16, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform conducted a high-profile forum, which featured Bishop Lori, as well as Baptist, Lutheran and Jewish leaders and church-affiliated university administrators who opposed the “accommodation” as unacceptable.

On March 1, the Senate will vote on the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act of 2012, an amendment introduced by Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., that would provide a broad exemption to employers and insurance carriers who oppose specific health services for moral or religious reasons. The Blunt amendment has been attached to a critical highway bill. Today, the New York Times described the upcoming Senate vote as a “showdown.”

Indeed, judging from the statements and discussion at the often heated House Judiciary Committee hearing, the “accommodation” has only injected more confusion and election-year spin into what was once a straightforward debate on the scope of constitutional protections for religious liberty and conscience rights.

Opponents of the mandate now must counter a strongly partisan effort to characterize their campaign as an attempt to bar access to contraception rather than a defense of the free exercise of religion, protected under the First Amendment.

“Ever since the mandate has been announced, fair is foul, and foul is fair,” stated Bishop Lori, expressing his frustration with an often contradictory political and media debate, which presents established jurisprudence on First Amendment rights as an intolerable threat to the provision of basic health care.

“‘Choice’ suddenly means ‘force,’” said Bishop Lori.

“I emphasize this word ‘force’ precisely because it is one of the key differences between a mere dispute over ‘reproductive health policy’ and a dispute over religious freedom. Those who would try to conceal that religious-freedom aspect have done all in their power to conceal the key element of government coercion,” he stated.

“This is not a matter of whether contraception may be prohibited by the government. ... Instead, it is a matter of whether religious people and institutions may be forced by the government to provide coverage for contraception or sterilization, even if that violates their religious beliefs.”

During the question period, some Democrats suggested that the president’s “accommodation” had fully addressed the objections of religious groups. Other Democrats adopted harsher tactics: Responding to the panelists’ defense of conscience rights, one congressman noted that desegregation also violated the personal beliefs of some Americans, and he appeared to imply that the bishops’ demands reflected an equally unacceptable belief. Bishop Lori “categorically” rejected the attempt to equate Church teaching with racism.

The Bridgeport bishop, for his part, sought to inject a note of realism and urgency amid rhetorical attacks and political theater.

“We are crossing the Rubicon,” he stated, pointing out that established jurisprudence and the health-care ethics of Catholics hospitals had served the nation well and should not be dismantled.

Panelists, including Jeanne Monahan, director of the Family Research Council’s Center for Human Dignity, and Asma Uddin, with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, stressed that the “accommodation” was not legally binding and that the original final rule remained on the books unaltered.

Rescission was “the real way out of this,” Bishop Lori replied. As approved, the federal rule unjustly required Catholic institutions to provide contraception, including abortion-inducing drugs. The rule forced Catholic organizations to be “a counter witness to our own teaching. … We could be fined,” he said, with “severe and crippling” fees.

His objections were challenged by Democrat committee members who reported that a number of Catholic organizations, the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities, the Catholic Health Association, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, and Sisters of Mercy of America were all “pleased” that adjustments are being made.

Further, during the question period, one panelist, a public-health expert, suggested that broad religious exemptions would produce an unpredictable patchwork system of health insurance that would leave many female employees unprotected.

The panelist, Dr. Linda Rosenstock, the dean of the School of Public Health at UCLA, chaired the Institute of Medicine’s Committee on Preventive Services for Women, which approved the list of co-pay-free mandatory services.

Rosenstock said she had attended the hearing to comment on the public-health need for expanded access to contraception services. But Democrats on the committee also pressed her to report on how Catholic health-care institutions had adapted to California’s contraception mandate. She suggested that church-affiliated employers had adapted fairly well to the state rule, noting that the hospital network Catholic Healthcare West included contraception in its insurance plan.

Rep. Dan Lundgren, R-Calif., a Catholic, countered that Catholic Healthcare West, now known as Dignity Health, had severed its ties with the Church. He added that the HHS mandate was anti-Catholic, a throwback to the religious bigotry of the 19th century, when hostility toward Catholics arose from Republican ranks and the Know-Nothing movement. Today, he said, Catholic institutions are attacked as “anti-science” because they do not accommodate anti-life policies and services.

“There is a conflict here,” concluded Lundgren, who said that the contraception mandate directly threatened the religious liberty of believers.

Members of the committee made repeated references to the 2012 election, underscoring the fact that the fight to repeal the HHS mandate has emerged as a hot campaign topic, with media commentators asking GOP contenders to explain whether they seek to deny contraception coverage to women. Some news analysts have suggested that Rick Santorum’s rise in the polls has been fueled by the controversy, as his supporters in the GOP base leap to defend First Amendment rights.

But the fight also has surfaced in House and Senate campaign battles. Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., whose support for contraception and abortion rights has drawn support from independent voters, has opposed the narrow religious exemption in the HHS mandate and endorsed the Respect for Conscience Rights Act, which is also backed by the bishops’ conference.

Brown’s opponent, Democratic candidate Elizabeth Warren, has vigorously attacked his endorsement of a bill she describes as a “dangerous measure that would allow insurance companies and employers to deny health-care coverage to anyone for any reason.”

Prominent women who support the bill have sought to add their voices to an often confusing and chaotic debate. But some say that victory depends on the bishops’ ability to lead and energize their flock.

Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan posted a Feb. 23 commentary that noted that the conscience bill could soon come to a vote “in the Senate. But members of both houses fear nothing will go forward without full, explicit and vigorous Church backing.”

Noonan then pondered the unthinkable: “What happens if the ruling stays? Will Catholic Charities close down? Assuming not, how big an annual fine will they have to pay if they refuse to bow to the mandate?

“A fine on faith. Who thought they’d live to see that in America?”

“Will the priests be talking about this on Sunday so the phones of senators are ringing Monday?” Noonan asked, posing a question that was not purely rhetorical.

It is time to rally around our priests and bishops, because things will get very unpleasant for them as this crisis unfolds. The pro-death crowd thinks it has an opportunity, and from its ranks there will erupt a howling fury upon the Church, above all its leaders. The lying propaganda campaign these people have rolled out to defend their culture of death is merely a beginning; history shows very clearly to what lengths they will extend their assault. Bishop Lori, your Knights, in solidarity with our priests, are answering your tocsin and alarum!

Posted by teddy beare on Thursday, Mar, 1, 2012 5:47 PM (EST):

We need David Barton to start working with the catholic church and overturn this “separation of church and state” LIES!!!! check it outhttp://www.wallbuilders.com

Posted by Jean on Thursday, Mar, 1, 2012 5:09 PM (EST):

I would like to see every parish in USA have Eucharisc Adoration & praying the rosary & really promoted from all of the clergy, especially the parish priests. This is a “war” if all of the Catholic Church doesn’t pull together then Obama & Congress leaders will be successful in completely breaking down the Constitution of the USA. The Courts have already given a good start but I see this as a final blow to America the former “land of the free”!
For the record: when I talk about Catholics I mean,those following the Church in all things, not the psuedo, cafeteria Catholics who think they can pick & choose what precepts of the Church their pride tells them they like! The Catholic Church is a package deal. You believe or you don’t. You"re Catholic or you are not, plain & simple! Pray, America.We are in a war & most people don’t even know what is at stake!!

Posted by D. R. Bohrer on Thursday, Mar, 1, 2012 3:42 PM (EST):

It’s simple really. Religious institutions need to affiliate with the AFL-CIO and become unions. Then the president will grant them a waiver.

Posted by JMJ on Thursday, Mar, 1, 2012 1:40 PM (EST):

We need to stop OBAMANISM now as it is so evil, taking the worst of Hitler, Lenin, Marx, etc. and putting them into this “new” package. The Mandate is only a very small part of the problem that Obamacare has shoved down our throats and if either Romney or the big “o” gets into office next year, it will be all over for America. Romneycare here in Mass. is such an illegal and immoral attack on us, on our health care and our pocketbook, and he thinks that it is the greatest think going. Let us all pray for Bishop Lori and Cardinal Dolan, and all of the other Bishops and Priests that are on the front line for Jesus and let us also pray that these so-called “catholics” that the “Democrats” like to keep shoving in our faces as if they spoke for the Roman Catholic Church, will once again become true Catholics and repent for their sordid actions. +JMJ+

We have only a few Bishops with any backbone. They are
remarkably silenced.

Some of our idiots are so stupid they even voted for him.
They are looking satan in the face and they don’t even recognize him.

They went around telling everyone ‘health care’ is a right.
It can never be a ‘right.’ Rights come from God, period.

Posted by Eric Junger on Thursday, Mar, 1, 2012 12:45 PM (EST):

One state, governor,bishop make injustice right,( Dem or Rep) prayer and reflection are needed, as well as action. The Rosery on Fri. Is a wonderful way for all to start.

Posted by tony mangini on Thursday, Mar, 1, 2012 12:11 PM (EST):

if you are going to work and find it difficult to stop and say the rosary, try saying the chaplet while driving or if possible, light a candle at church with a prayer request—-

Posted by Jane on Thursday, Mar, 1, 2012 10:53 AM (EST):

Think of the economics involved in this decision by the “Administration”: From tubal.org (an organization for women who have had tubal ligation: between 750,000 and 1,000,000 million women each year undergo tubal ligation for the purpose of birth control. According to Planned Parenthood (you know they have their hands in this), the cost of a tubal is in the range of $1,500 to $6,000 per procedure. The “free” procedure your insurance company will be required to pay for on average will cost between $1,312,500,000 and $5,250,000,000 (yes, billion). I don’t think an insurance company will provide this for “free;” nor will any physician. Someone is going to have to pay for it (or is already paying for it depending on which State you live). This is the cost of just one form of “free birth control.” We should not just be morally outraged (which this issue has me more involved than I have been in ages) - we should be screaming at the added costs that will be forced on us…Then, maybe “others” will start to listen. The cost of things always is a good motivator.

Posted by veritas on Wednesday, Feb, 29, 2012 11:36 PM (EST):

One interesting possibility that one of the more enterprising Drug Companies might consider ... how about dropping the manufacture and distribution of contraceptives and marketing that fact to all Catholics and other people of conscience ... they would no doubt be shocked by how much “brand loyalty” that they would get. That would be real “Social Justice”.

Posted by azul on Wednesday, Feb, 29, 2012 10:10 PM (EST):

The law that President Obama has mandated has been law in AZ since 1997. It gives an exemption that covers only places that hire predominately people of the same faith, like the Diocese of Phoenix. It does not cover Catholic hospitals or charities that hire many people of lots of different faiths or no faith. This law was proposed by a AZ State Representative Linda Binder in a Republican controlled congress and signed into law by Catholic and Republican Governor Jane Hull. Bishop Olmsted and Bishop O’Brien before him have never protested that this law in AZ violated religious conscience or religious liberty. The HHS mandate would not change anything in AZ. So is this only a violation of religious freedom if a democrat makes it a law?

Posted by Kate Madrid on Wednesday, Feb, 29, 2012 9:32 PM (EST):

That’s wonderful Floyd! I will participate!

Posted by Eric Junger on Wednesday, Feb, 29, 2012 8:31 PM (EST):

The Rosary is a wonderful way to protest the HHS decision and preserve “Our First Amendment Rights!

Posted by Floyd Alsbach on Wednesday, Feb, 29, 2012 6:51 PM (EST):

A Prayerful Protest of Religious Oppression by the Obama administration:
Friday 3-3-12 every confirmed Catholic, whether at work, home, driving, playing, or at school is asked to pull over and stop at 10am, taking 15 minutes to say the Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary. On Friday 3-9-12, again at 10am, every confirmed Catholic is asked to pull over and stop, taking 30 minutes to say the Sorrowful & Joyful Mysteries (2 Rosaries). On Friday 3-16-12 every confirmed Catholic is asked to pull over and stop again at 10:00am taking 45 minutes to say the Sorrowful, Joyful & Glorious Mysteries (3 Rosaries) taking 45 minutes. On Friday 3-23-12 again at 10:00am every confirmed Catholic is asked to pull over and stop taking an hour to say The Sorrowful, Joyful, Glorious, and Luminous Mysteries (four Rosaries). Catholics performing absolutely critical tasks, emergency services, critical patient care, Police and Firemen in the midst of duty are asked to postpone until the nearest available time, and then prayerfully participate. Each following Friday until the HHS decision is rescinded in full we must add 15 minutes more to our prayers, and another Rosary to our protest for however long it takes to remove this assault upon our First Amendment rights.

Posted by S Flory on Wednesday, Feb, 29, 2012 2:29 PM (EST):

Bishop Lori needs to more positively state that Jesuit Colleges,Catholic Health Health Association ( Sister Carol) Sisters of Mercy etc do not speak for the Church. Their partisan opinions do not matter. They do not have prudential qualifications in this matter. The Catholic Church is a voluntary organization. If these people do not want to accept the authority of the Bishops, they should find another church in which to worship, and stop calling themselves Catholic. As a matter of fact many so called Catholic Universities have signed papers saying they want to be apart from the CAtholic Church. The Land of Lakes Agreement comes to mind. Our Bishops and Cardinals have much power over all CAtholic enterprises in their dioceses. It is unfortunate that they do not use more of it. The Bishops should not fear the power of religious orders such as the Jesuits who have direct representation to the Vatican. If necessary the Bishop can be heard before he same tribual. The Bishop is in charge of his diocese and all that goes on here. If the Bishops will lead, the Faithful will follow.

Posted by The last man on Wednesday, Feb, 29, 2012 10:18 AM (EST):

I would love to see some backbone from the Bishops when push comes to shove, but I won’t hold my breath.

Posted by James Doran on Wednesday, Feb, 29, 2012 10:00 AM (EST):

If this is not a call to get Obama out of office, I don’t know what is.

Join the Discussion

We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words.
By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines.
Comments are published at our discretion. We won't publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words.
Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.